IAEA Knew Within Weeks of Japanese Earthquake that Reactors Had Melted Down … Public Not Told for a Month and a Half
As I noted last week, reactors 1, 2 and 3 all melted down within hours of the Japanese earthquake.
On Monday, Mainchi Daily News provided an important tidbit:
A meltdown occurred at one of the reactors at the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant three and a half hours after its cooling system started malfunctioning, according to the result of a simulation using “severe accident” analyzing software developed by the Idaho National Laboratory.
Chris Allison [a former manager and technical leader at Idaho National Laboratory], who had actually developed the analysis and simulation software, reported the result to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in late March. It was only May 15 when Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) admitted for the first time that a meltdown had occurred at the No. 1 reactor at the Fukushima nuclear plant.
According to Allison’s report obtained by the Mainichi, the simulation was based on basic data on light-water nuclear reactors at the Laguna Verde Nuclear Power Plant in Mexico that are about the same size as that of the No. 1, 2, and 3 reactors in Fukushima.
According to the simulation, the reactor core started melting about 50 minutes after the emergency core cooling system of the No. 1 reactor stopped functioning and the injection of water into the reactor pressure vessel came to a halt. About an hour and 20 minutes later, the control rod and pipes used to gauge neutrons started melting and falling onto the bottom of the pressure vessel. After about three hours and 20 minutes, most of the melted fuel had piled up on the bottom of the pressure vessel. At the four hour and 20 minute mark, the temperature of the bottom of the pressure vessel had risen to 1,642 degrees Celsius, close to the melting point for the stainless steel lining, probably damaging the pressure vessel.
In other words, the IAEA knew in late March that there was a meltdown. The IAEA informs all of its member states of important nuclear developments.
Government agencies sat on this information, and the world didn’t learn the truth until the operator of the stricken reactors itself made the announcement a month and a half later.
This is not entirely surprising given that governments have been covering up nuclear meltdowns for fifty years to protect the nuclear industry.
H/t: Ex-Skf
Tweet
Facebook
Reddit
Digg this!
May 26th, 2011 at 12:11 pm
The NYTimes reported in March about the likely meltdowns. That the reactors had degrees of meltdown was understood widely in April, and even by careful watchers since….well, since days after the tsunami:
Tsuinami: Mar 11
Nytimes, Mar 13: “A partial meltdown, like those suspected at two reactors in northeastern Japan over the weekend…”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/science/earth/14meltdown.html
Even one day after the tsunami:
Mar 12: “Officials monitoring the Daiichi (or No. 1) plant in Fukushima have said they detected a radioactive byproduct, cesium, that could indicate that some of the nuclear fuel in Reactor No. 1 was damaged and a partial meltdown had occurred.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/13/world/asia/13accidents.html
During March to early April, while simulations suggested significant meltdowns, and everyone watching closing knew meltdowns had happened, by inference from emissions, the only question open on that was the degree of meltdown. The degree depended on how low the water levels had gotten, and that wasn’t known accurately, but only simulated. But regardless of the precise degree, unknowable until inspection, the emissions were the real bottom line.
May 26th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Hello,
I am a science writer at Idaho National Lab and need to clarify that Chris Allison has not worked here since 1996. He took software developed at the lab and has been working with it on his own, but his current work is not affiliated with INL. Furthermore, it’s worth pointing out that no simulation software can predict exactly what happened at Fukushima, especially without precise data about plant conditions.
Thanks for the opportunity to clarify this information,
Nicole Stricker, PhD.
Idaho National Laboratory
May 26th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
when they melted down is frankly irrelevant next to “why the exploded” which according to our happy go lucky Nuclear Power Industry and Capture Regulatory Agency is “impossible.” They need to change their web page from that to “are you going to believe me or lying eyes MOFO!” Obviously “the seawater flowing in” wasn’t “part of the plan” but in fact “part of God’s plan.” As in “here comes the seawater! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!” Seems hilarious…and as with most hilarity “there is a striking degree of truth to it!” Obviously “what happens when three (that we know of) melted cores reach the water table” seems more important now than “that they were lying all along!” The latter simply put “hasn’t been news since day ONE” okay? Now–”let us fact check with our friends at the NRC and” oh look it says! “when nuclear material reaches the water table it simply cools down faster.” Oh, Thank God! There’s still no crisis only “a few problems with the truth.”
May 26th, 2011 at 2:52 pm
oh, yeah and…is it”Nick”–Nicole? Ms Stricken? Sticker you say? PhD is it? I got a Master’s myself. In STAND UP COMEDY! How ’bout i pay a visit to Idaho and you and i, you know–(get together or somethin’)….